Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32635301›Full record

ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Compensate for or Minimize Matrix Effects? Strategies for Overcoming Matrix Effects in Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Technique: A Tutorial Review.

Manuela Cortese, Maria Rosa Gigliobianco, Federico Magnoni, Roberta Censi, Piera Di Di Martino

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 90 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
90citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

90 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Chemical standardization of kava (Pharmaceutical biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. ZrOToxins · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Targeted LC-MS/MS method for quantifying respiratory pharmaceuticals in wastewater.Environmental science : water research & technology · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Manuela CorteseLaboratory of Mass Spectrometry, University of Camerino, School of Pharmacy, Via S. Agostino, 62032 Camerino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7622-1657
Maria Rosa GigliobiancoLaboratory of Pharmaceutical and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Camerino, School of Pharmacy, Via S. Agostino, 62032 Camerino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9699-4673
Federico MagnoniInstitute for Material Research & Innovation, University of Bolton, Deane Road, Bolton BL3 5AB, UK.
Roberta CensiLaboratory of Pharmaceutical and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Camerino, School of Pharmacy, Via S. Agostino, 62032 Camerino, Italy.
Piera Di Di MartinoLaboratory of Pharmaceutical and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Camerino, School of Pharmacy, Via S. Agostino, 62032 Camerino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7657-3556

Funding

European Commission 734684European Commission 777682European Commission 872860
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent decades, mass spectrometry techniques, particularly when combined with separation methods such as high-performance liquid chromatography, have become increasingly important in pharmaceutical, bio-analytical, environmental, and food science applications because they afford high selectivity and sensitivity. However, mass spectrometry has limitations due to the matrix effects (ME), which can be particularly marked in complex mixes, when the analyte co-elutes together with other molecules, altering analysis results quantitatively. This may be detrimental during method validation, negatively affecting reproducibility, linearity, selectivity, accuracy, and sensitivity. Starting from literature and own experience, this review intends to provide a simple guideline for selecting the best operative conditions to overcome matrix effects in LC-MS techniques, to obtain the best result in the shortest time. The proposed methodology can be of benefit in different sectors, such as pharmaceutical, bio-analytical, environmental, and food sciences. Depending on the required sensitivity, analysts may minimize or compensate for ME. When sensitivity is crucial, analysis must try to minimize ME by adjusting MS parameters, chromatographic conditions, or optimizing clean-up. On the contrary, to compensate for ME analysts should have recourse to calibration approaches depending on the availability of blank matrix. When blank matrices are available, calibration can occur through isotope labeled internal standards and matrix matched calibration standards; conversely, when blank matrices are not available, calibration can be performed through isotope labeled internal standards, background subtraction, or surrogate matrices. In any case, an adjusting of MS parameters, chromatographic conditions, or a clean-up are necessary.

Indexed as

CalibrationChromatography, LiquidHumansIsotope LabelingPharmaceutical PreparationsReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsSurface PropertiesTandem Mass SpectrometryPharmaceutical PreparationsHPLC-MSmatrix effectmethod validation

Identifiers

PMID32635301
PMCPMC7412464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.